Sony needs to innovate as well and I believe they will. One of the jobs of anyone who releases a platform is to lead the charge and show what it has to offer. Sony knows the PS3 had a negative image in the beginning due to its high price. I don't think they will make the same mistake. A game console needs to also be affordable, otherwise you might as well build a PC.

Sony also knows they have to attract the mainstream public and that the gaming world around them has changed. The developers so far seem pleased with the hardware which is always a good sign and Sony went knocking on their door to see what it was they wanted.

The thing is we all need to just accept gamers of all stripes. Those who play casual games, those who enjoy motion type games, those who like hardcore games and the indie scene. We often want to label people out of ignorance or because we feel threatened by their existence without realizing gaming can expand. There just has to be a good balance of the software you provide.

sony went against the grain of the industry. They didnt build easy systems to program for, they built systems to challenge the creativity within the developers.

so now they take a change of direction and build a system the devs are interested in. Now they could have done that because of developer pressure to have a platform with a quick turnaround on investment OR they could have done it because they know the cost of specialized programming tools adds to the development cost and some companies just dont have that kind of $$ to spend.

For whatever their reason, sony made a change to their strategy. We will know by the quality of the titles released if that change was good or bad.

will developers take the easy route and turn out games that arent up to the quality sony is synonymous for? or will they try and push their creative side to use the more familiar platform design in unique ways nobody thought of?

They didn't use cheaper hardware because of a fear of a small install base. They went for cheaper hardware because the company as a whole is struggling and needs to be able to make as much money as possible, but at the same time, they wanted to offer gamers a serious upgrade from their current consoles.

I don't doubt "Sony" or their 1st/2nd party divisions. I know they will deliver above and beyond the rest.

It's "the rest" that i have doubt with. Taking the easy route generally results in quick and dirty cash in type of games that feel unfinished and/or incomplete. thus resulting in the DLC routine and patches up the whazoo.

We really can only expect nothing but the finest work from sony and if Sony has some sort of clause that there be no cheap shovelware released for the PS4 then we will likely see games released for it that have no place.

They may have a higher standard for their own IP's but unless they hold the same standard to all other 3rd parties then a platform that is cheap and easy will result in similar titles from 3rd parties just trying to make a fast buck.

The hardware may exceed the previous generation but if the games do not then what's the use? Sony needs to hold every developer accountable for their software if it is to be released on the PS4. Quality control needs to be enforced. But with costs at an all time high, they probably cant be picky about every detail and we will get unfavorable releases like we have seen in every generation before.

@gaffy...if sony is struggling then i fear we will get quantity over quality this time around. Sony making a system easy to develop for opens the flood gate to any/every kind of game developer that wants to release their game.

I dont have a problem with the ones that show a legitimate passion for creating something fun but at the same time there will be those with the quick and easy way of thinking that will flood the market with crap that buries the good stuff like what we see on ios and droid devices.

yeah, i just compared the PS4 to the mobility market. If there is no quality control....that is where things are headed.

@darthv27 tbh It seems to me that you're kind of stating a business practice that Sony have been excising for nearly twenty years, and that's quality control. Sony are for the core gamers, and with their multitude of studios there's no worry there. In regards to multiplats I don't think Sony can direly dictate the standard there anyway.

Any company needs to innovate to stay relevant. I think Sony's social network ideas are pretty solid. I honestly don't mind it using lower than expected specs if it 1) helps the system be more affordable and more competitive in the market and 2) helps keep Sony in the black more so than the PS3 did in its initial years.

The graphics for the upcoming exclusives look just under the par of CGI movies, so honestly do not mind what they're doing right now and I'm surprised that it's received as much criticism as it has (no console?! DERPY DOO!).

This has confirmed what I've been saying all along. Sony saw the backlash after they charged a measly $100 extra for the PS3's top end model, so now they have to make it cheaper. They can't include a better shader modeler since it would be too costly. I think Sony should have beefed up the PS4 and sold it for a couple extra hundred bucks, or at least have the option to sell it for more, with a cheaper $500 option like last time, at least we would be getting a better console!

full quote. "so maybe that’s a kind of defensive move against their expectation that they’re not going to have the same install base, or maybe they just want to hit profitability quicker because of Sony’s less stable financial state at the moment.”

Just saying the 1st part makes no sense and makes it a dumb suggestion without explanation (which cousins did explain but that explanation is still just his assumption)

The latter makes much more sense.So that shouldve been the title instead.

@Darth - Quality depends on the developer not the console itself. Sony's first and second party developers will continue to make amazing games that will still be more optimized than the majority of third party titles.

So...developer friendly hardware=lazy developers? Give me some examples. As far as I can tell, crap games are crap games. The original Playstation was easy to develop for, yet the original Playstation out performed the N64 and Saturn in terms of quantity...so quality? Well, do you reckon the N64 and saturn had better games then PS1? PS1 certainly had it's fair share of "quality games", and these games didn't seem to have much trouble standing out from crowd of common dross.

Sony do have a set of technical standards that every game must meet before shipping (it's called a TRC) whether or not they reach YOUR pius standards, I don't know. And I don't see the need in filtering out the rubbish games either. You have to take the good with bad, that's life. It's up to you to decide which games you want to play and which ones you want to avoid. Who keeps the quality filter on all the music that gets made these days?

Sony is the global leader in console sales, so what do they have to be worried about exactly? Also MS went with even cheaper hardware than the PS4 so does that mean that they have twice the level of anxiety and fear of losing out market share?

Seems like Sony is no longer so arrogant and has come to realize that it has lost a huge chunk of market share and projects itself as losing even more next gen. Sony must start making decisions that make financial sense if it wants to survive next gen.

This is not suggested by EA but by some ex-employees. These websites always twist and tell, just to get more hits. Look at the title, writer has created a sensational title by mixing to statements in a different contexts. Shallow journalism, something is under the rug.

Once the install base is established i wouldn't be surprised if they realesed a better spec one.

*by better spec I don't mean ram etc*

What mean is a bigger hard drive or built in functionality for something's or even just am extra USB slot. If they went for the cheap option then it's highly likely they would release a more expensive one. Seems business models are lost on some people

Pretty sure the xbox 360s was a pretty big upgrade in regards to hardware. Infact, comparing the original 360 to the current one and you'll see a world of difference(most people don't even remember there was no HDMI port in the first release).

Did you read what he written? he talked about HDD, usb slots! And yes that happened before.. the first ps3 had 4 usb slots and the next ones had only 2. There are a lot of ps3 versions with differents hdd. You should read before writting...

To all guys above and below telling people that they should learn how to read: The original poster CLEARLY edited the post after the confusion over the point. The point about HDD and USB was clarified AFTER all the other posts were made.

Yeah I think MS is the only one to ever release a better version afterwards. I mean ofc better by HDMI (something fundamental). MS is also the only one to ever make the games require a HDD even when they sold a HDD-less version of their console and publicly said that HDD is not a mandatory purchase.

But hey I've come to learn that it's forbidden to talk about these things on this site. You get called a Sony nuthugger the minute you speak of these things. That's why I lost my bubbles. Broken system is broken. I can hear the angry typing right now so I'll make my escape before it happens.

@insomnium2 dont forget XBOX 360 core package released in 2005 No HDD No HDMI No Built-in Wifi HD-DVD (failed) No HD-DVD player No wireless controller All this was added later. And the joke about it is that, if you added these missing features to the core or the arcade, at that time, it would have costed more than a high end PS3 at launch ($599).

PS3 in still pretty much the same minus 2 usb ports, dual shock and BC. People don't realize how much M$ nickled and dimed the xbox faithful at launch with their console.

That's why I'm going to wait and see to evaluate both consoles before making my final decision. But as of right now its leaning towards sony again.